Harman Curve Compliance

[Keith_W]

Refreshing to see people admitting the Harman curve is a good starting point and recommending people adjust using EQ to their personal preferences.

That's actually Sean Olive's position. He told me in personal communication that the Harman curve is only valid for the test fixture, the actual FR you hear is variable, with the most variability below 300Hz and above 2kHz. Below 300Hz, the variability depends on the adequacy of the seal, clamping pressure, and whether you wear glasses. Above 2kHz, it depends on the shape of the pinna and length of the ear canal. About the only part of the Harman curve that is reliable from person-to-person is between 300Hz - 2kHz.

 

[solderdude]

He told me in personal communication that the Harman curve is only valid for the test fixture,

Yep, and only for the given test conditions such as measuring SPL, positioning, pad wear, seal of that specific copy or ... an average of seatings/copies.
Still a decent indicator between 200Hz and a few kHz for tonality (not sound quality).

For that reason headphone FR measurements are indicative at best and not an objective measure of (perceived) sound quality and comfort.

 

[Keith_W]

Still a decent indicator between 200Hz and a few kHz for tonality (not sound quality).

This part needs to be emphasized, over and over again. Too many people on ASR think that compliance to Harman curve is all that matters. Sure, it is important, but it's not everything.

 

[TTT15]

Many thanks again. No one can give you the answers you are looking for they don’t exist is actually a really helpful answer. I have indeed been circling to see if I was missing a more objective way of choosing but I don’t think I have apart from harman curve and EQ.

My perception is that the HD800S is a bit of a classic and certainly for the price there is an element of fashion about competitor products. I understand that magnetic planars are relatively easy to design and produce in small batches.

The Stealth is the favourite headphone of my friendly local dealer although he also said it is preference rather than better. It is the one in his view. I preferred HD800S in direct comparison . Although if all dacs and amps are the same I’m not convinced that the Naim Uniti Atom HE used even though I wanted to like it is as good as Topping or many other similar sounding products I heard at WoH. That doesn’t mean I think it’s a better headphone. It isn’t. They are both good in my view. I reluctantly sold the HD800S. If I was into classical or gaming I think it could be my headphone of choice. If I was having a harem of headphones the HD800S and Dan Clark would be in there but I decided to declutter as I don’t have much time to listen to headphones. I just prefer a more intimate in my head soundstage for my taste in alternative music.

I’ve basically negotiated new for second hand prices on new set up and everything is a compromise between different qualities but the best set up I’ve heard for my preferences. You and Solderdude have been very helpful in particular in answering my questions. Appreciate the considered education rather than judgement from people with more experience.

 

[TTT15]

I suspect others like me are looking for the comfort and security of objective certainty when in reality that doesn’t exist given our different personal physiology, biases and preferences. That doesn’t mean that harman isn’t useful and interesting research.

 

[Robbo99999]

That's actually Sean Olive's position. He told me in personal communication that the Harman curve is only valid for the test fixture, the actual FR you hear is variable, with the most variability below 300Hz and above 2kHz. Below 300Hz, the variability depends on the adequacy of the seal, clamping pressure, and whether you wear glasses. Above 2kHz, it depends on the shape of the pinna and length of the ear canal. About the only part of the Harman curve that is reliable from person-to-person is between 300Hz - 2kHz.

Yep, and only for the given test conditions such as measuring SPL, positioning, pad wear, seal of that specific copy or ... an average of seatings/copies.
Still a decent indicator between 200Hz and a few kHz for tonality (not sound quality).

For that reason headphone FR measurements are indicative at best and not an objective measure of (perceived) sound quality and comfort.

This part needs to be emphasized, over and over again. Too many people on ASR think that compliance to Harman curve is all that matters. Sure, it is important, but it's not everything.

It's still the curve that "sounded best to most people" in their studies, so I think it's the best place to start. Tweaking bass level to get that aspect right I found relatively easy using one of Oratory's Low Shelf Filters at 105Hz. Altering "air" with one of this 10kHz High Shelfs also seemed quite easy in the past. Tweaking the rest of the frequency range I found more difficult - if Sean Olive thought 300 - 2kHz was very reliable person to person then praps a person could experiment with just a 3kHz High Shelf Filter. I just know after removing the variable of unit to unit variation (Oratory measured a few of my headphones) that I prefer Harman Curve as is, and with all my other headphones I've had to play about with it a bit more which you'd think is due to unit to unit variation, but I've never ended up with drastic changes away from Harman when tuning by ear away from Harman, which I postulate was due to unit to unit variation variable rather than anything else. I don't think we should downplay Harman, but reality is for absolute best sound when EQ'ing you'd also be doing some "subtle" EQ to likely be accounting for unit to unit variation even if you were actually a Harman Lover (lol) & didn't know it yet. This is why I've said in this thread that one of the most important things is buying a low unit to unit variation headphone, (which would in addition increase your chances of getting good channel matching). I don't think we need to downplay Harman and try to "invalidate" or "deprioritise" the headphone measurements that happen on this site.

 

[mk05]

I went with JBL Tune (updated Endurance Race), which was a recommendation from a different thread where a user posted some data. FWIW, I can't stand (wired) headphones, and frankly only wear earbuds to work out(, or pretend like I can't be bothered on an airplane). SQ was not a primary determinant requirement, as much as ANC/fit, PEQ, and SPL. The ANC/fit was easy to address since I bought a pair of iem tips that worked great for me, and simply transfer to new ones. I think this is probably the biggest issue with most people. Some like the perfectly round, some like the Bose style, others like the Apple shape. The other issues of PEQ and SPL were addressed by JBL's inherent design. I try not to take phone calls on wireless, and tend to use a wired AKG/Samsung earbuds that I bought on Amzn for $10 back in the day - I had been told that it produces excellent call quality.